J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
Stemcyte India Therapeutics Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax, Ahmedabad-III – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant's appeal and factual background. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments from both parties regarding service tax liability. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observations on the nature of services provided. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. discussion on the limitation period and applicable law. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 5. legal reasoning surrounding tax liability and exemptions (Para 8) |
| 6. court's ruling on the applicability of exemptions. (Para 10) |
| 7. final decision and comments on penalties imposed. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 8. final ruling on service tax liability (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT :
R. MAHADEVAN, J.
1. These appeals have been preferred by the appellant/assessee challenging the common Final Order dated 02.08.2024 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Ahmedabad1 [For short “CESTAT”] in Service Tax Appeal Nos. 12168/2018 and 11738/2016. By the impugned order, the CESTAT rejected the appeals filed by the appellant and upheld the orders passed by the lower authorities. In doing so, it held that the services of enrolment, collection, processing, and storage of umbilical cord blood stem cells, provided by the appellant during the period from 01.07.2012 to 16.02.2014, do not f
K.P. Mohammed Salim vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Lucknow Development Authority vs. M.K. Gupta
CCE vs. Chemphar Drugs and Liniments, Hyderabad
CCE vs. Chemphar Drugs and Liniments
Pushpam Pharmaceuticals Co. vs. CCE
CCE vs. Punjab Laminates (P) Ltd.
Primella Sanitary Products (P) Ltd. vs. CCE
Pahwa Chemicals (P) Ltd. vs. CCE
CIT vs. Harprasad and Co. (P) Ltd.
Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. vs. CIT
Services by stem cell banks qualifying as healthcare are exempt from service tax under Notification No. 25/2012-ST, and extended limitation periods require proof of intent to evade tax.
Activities classified as taxable services under service tax law despite claims of horticulture and municipal function exemptions, with penalties upheld for non-disclosure.
The demand for service tax was invalid due to the lack of evidence for willful suppression or fraud, making the issuance of the show cause notice time-barred.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.